Kashmiris and their sympathisers all around the world have just finished with their massive protest against India on the Republic Day of India – the 26th January. My grandmother in Kashmir would look at the sky and in a grim, punctuated voice would say, “The sky is deep red. Someone has been murdered, somewhere”. If we use the measure of olden times to confirm a murder and how it upset the people, one would expect a deep red sky looking down on New Delhi, and angry about the behaviour of Indian security forces, who kill the Kashmiris. The circus of death did not halt even on the Republic day of India. Maybe the Indians of my grandmother’s generation, would have felt instinctively, that the sky over India was mourning the murder of Kashmiris. One wonders that if the representative of India has made a statement at the 234th meeting of the UN Security Council held on 23 January 1948, that, “My Government has repeatedly assured the Security Council, and I give the assurance once again, that it desires a peaceful solution to Jammu and Kashmir situation”, why does India need to put in place a ‘strong state doctrine’, meant to use brutal force and “kill as many as possible”. I have been here in Pakistan from December 2018 and have participated in Kashmir Conferences organised by think tanks, universities, political parties and participated in many TV discussions. I had the opportunity to meet the President of Pakistan and benefit from his wise counsel on the Kashmir issue. Indian narrative has graduated from January 1948, and today it has turned into wicked slander. India accused Pakistan of engineering a revolt in Kashmir on January 1948, and since 1990 India has upgraded its narrative and has accused Pakistan of sponsoring terrorism in Kashmir. The phrase ‘engineering a revolt’ has been replaced by a new accusation of ‘sponsoring terrorism’ in Kashmir. The circus of death did not halt even on the Republic day of India. Maybe the Indians of my grandmother’s generation, would have felt instinctively, that the sky over India was mourning the murder of Kashmiris In bilateral diplomacy there are no witnesses. The two parties may not always hold on to moral moorings, but it is different when a country makes a declaration at the UN Security Council meeting in regard to an issue. India’s position could not be any different when it made a formal statement at the UN Security Council in regard to the Kashmir accession. The representative of India made a declaration at the 234th meeting of UN Security Council, in the presence of Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom and United States of America, that, “The Indian Government was careful, even though the request (for accession) came from both, to stipulate that it was accepting the accession only on the condition that later, when peace had been restored, the expression of the popular will, should be ascertained in a proper manner. It was on that condition, and that condition alone, that the Indian Government accepted accession. That condition may be seen from the correspondence which has already been read to the Security Council, and which forms part of the documents filed with the Security Council”. At the same meeting Indian representative has stated that, “We stress the urgency and immediacy of the situation, because it is difficult to forecast how a military situation may develop and tend to widen the area of conflict.” Kashmir conflict has progressed from a less belligerent irritation into a full blown tragedy, which has the potential to disturb the nuclear calm between India and Pakistan. How the Kashmiri leadership was advocating their case with India and Pakistan is explained by Ghulam Mohammad Sadiq, the acting Head of Administration of the Jammu and Kashmir State in 1947. He was deputed to approach the Pakistan Government at the highest level to recognize democratic rights of the Kashmiri people for self- determination and abide by the sovereign will of the free people on the question of free association with either of the Dominions. Today Pakistan is the lead advocate of Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination and India has been dragging its feet in honouring the commitments made at the UN Security Council. India could wriggle out of a bilateral agreement or an understanding privately reached with Pakistan by reneging on its word. In a multilateral situation where India has been making declarations after declarations before the Security Council and before the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan, where countries in attendance become witnesses, it is not easy to wriggle out. It is the fear of strong evidence recorded against it during these debates on Kashmir at the UN and before the UNCIP that India continues to lure Pakistan away from any engagement at the United Nations. Indian security forces, who are supposed to assist the civil authorities in maintaining law and order and during the preparation for a UN supervised referendum, have turned against the people. Killing a Kashmiri has become a common sport. These forces need to be stopped from committing war crimes, crimes against peace and humanity in Kashmir. Reporting them to International Criminal Court needs to be considered. Government of Pakistan needs to take India head on in the United Nations. They need to support the NGOs in their work to sensitise the question of “rights and dignity” and “security and self-determination” of the people of Kashmir. Unless we consolidate the work on Kashmir, the disjointed spread of work does not have the strength to bring any relief in Kashmir. If Kashmir moves to a second alternative of an arbitration or is referred to International Court of Justice, India’s non-compliance of UN Resolutions on Kashmir will have no merit. The writer is the President of JKCHR – NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Published in Daily Times, January 30th 2019.